click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20120929
20121007
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
. they've been following what mitt romney has said. >> right. >> they're tuning in to the fact that he wasn't telling the truth last night. >> the conversation we had just a moment ago says on some of these things there are different ways of looking at t the point is, who is going to make the best point to the american people? some things can be proven definitively right or wrong. andrew sullivan, an influential supporter of the president and blogger called his performance absolutely disgracefully bad. let me play a sound bite of what he said and let you respond to that. >> i have never seen a president of the united states blather, blather on like that, bore us, tell us none of his major arguments, fight back against any of the obvious distortions of the other candidate and just sit there. i mean, really. and you know how much i love this guy. >> stephanie, did you feel a little bit of that frustration? >> you know, i appreciate his opinion. i disagree with it. i think the president had a good performance last night. obviously, mitt romney had a good performance, but that's just what
, lower income families with children would pay an average $2,000 more. but mitt romney is right to point out that others have poked holes in the math, including bloomberg, that middle class would be hit with an increase of only $1,000 not $2,000. the tax policy center was told about this. according to bloomberg, the authors changed some of their statements. the conservative tax foundation claims that the center didn't account for economic growth and romney's plan would pay for itself, that there would be no middle class income tax increase. last month came on the show and did the math and said if you close or cap itemized deductions and assume that the economy grows at 3%. historically, that would be reasonable. right now it's been a challenge. they would raise $200 billion, which means you wouldn't have to raise taxes on the middle class. it could add up. if he could sell it, could it be the issue that wins him the election? the senior political analyst and fiscal responsibility and reform. great to see both of you. appreciate it. doug, let me start with you. this stood out to me last n
if karl rove doesn't like how mitt romney does tomorrow night, he could give a lot of that $60 million, the biggest chunk of change, to, i don't know, senate candidates, congressional candidates, and not romney. >> that's right, erin. there are a lot of republicans and democrats who are very closely watching what these outside groups -- and it's not just the super pacs we have the money for and the finances. but also these 5014 c nonprofit groups raising a ton more money, the karl rove gps, the koch brothers, americans for prosperity. and there is a feeling that if mitt romney starts to look like he can't win, that they will pull the plug on him, and start diverting the money that they otherwise would have spent on his campaign, on congressional campaigns, and that really underscores the difference between these sort of post citizens united elections where the power and the determination of viability is really being made by these outside groups versus before where you had the parties being able to decide, hey, we think this candidate has a chance. and in 1996, for instance, we saw the
while in office than were lost, but mitt romney points out correctly, they are not the right quality. no, this is not morning in america. it's also not a disaster. >> ethan, jump in here. are you encouraged? >> i am. i totally agree with ali. mitt romney's been saying that we've been having x month of unemployment above 8%. he can't that anymore. on top of that, the president can say he's created over a million private sector jobs, so he has some new powerful rhetorical arrows that are in his quiver. >> when i saw this today, i thought this fits perfectly into this narrative of a country that's divided because it's a little bit good news. not a lot, and it leaves everybody with room to argue. >> symbolically, it was a victory for the white house to get that unemployment rate under 8% along with just about everybody else. i predicted that would be the key to obama winning re-election, but objectively, if you look at the numbers, there are some real problems with the number of people who have dropped out of the labor force. you're comparing it to reagan, morning in america, you compare the
, 38 days is a long time to go. >> she's got to say that, right? she's got to get her people out to vote. i want to ask you because there's been so much criticism of the polls from the romney side of things. people have said the polls assume more democrats are going to turn out. at cnn, our polls do not assume that and chris wallace, fox news, said the criticism of the polls craziness. he said no self-respecting pollster in the country would a political party, so even fox doesn't seem to be backing the conspiracy theories on your side. >> all i'm doing is trying to explain there are different polls. one of the numbers your viewers should keep watching is to look at obama -- president obama's job approval ratings. they have been in the mid 40s for much of the year. twice they've spiked to around 50. right now, he's around 50. this is about a high water mark for president obama. each time he has gotten to that magical 50% has immediately dropped back down. look, if he can keep his job approval rating at 50 or higher, he's going to be in a good position, but he's never been able to
should be drawn right here. >> after dropping this on the u.n. yesterday, he talks to obama and romney today. what israel's line in the sand would mean for all of us. plus, have you seen chelsea lately?
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)